AIC

Budd Hopkins

Author, Artist, UFO/abduction Researcher

---

A REPLY TO THE NEW YORK AREA SKEPTICS

(A new article from Budd Hopkins)

---

Some months after I delivered a lecture on the UFO abduction phenomenon at the Chappaqua, New York, library, I received a letter from a program director of the New York Area Skeptics. The writer had attended my lecture and as a result was inviting me to participate in a "debate" on "the nature of UFOs" before his organization. I, or a surrogate debater, was being asked to "defend" what he described as "this point of view," though he neglected to spell out exactly what he meant by that phrase.

 The following is my answer to his politely worded invitation, which I subsequently mailed to him. I publish it here in full, though I have omitted the name and address of the Skeptics' official to whom it was sent, and my own telephone number.

 Despite the obvious fact that each of us has his or her personal policy about such invitations, I offer my reply as one possible response, in the hope that some may find it useful in similar situations.

Dear [Sir] :

I must apologize for my delay in answering your letter and invitation to debate the New York Area Skeptics. Since I received your letter I have been travelling extensively and then undergoing the holidays, so many things have been postponed.

 With regard to a debate with your group, my policy is this: I believe an extraordinary phenomenon - which the UFO reports certainly comprise - demands an extraordinary investigation. Too often I have been on programs of one sort of another with skeptics who hold strong personal beliefs about the UFO phenomenon but who have never carried out an investigation and who have little information as to the range or weight of the supporting evidence.

Ironically, I find myself the skeptic in such confrontations. I am not sure until I investigate an abduction report whether I am dealing with a hoaxer; with someone who is, to at least some extent, suffering from psychological problems; or with someone who is truthfully reporting a real, physical experience. Here, the so-called skeptic is all too often the true believer: he/she knows that the third option is impossible because UFO abductions are not happening. From my more open position I can entertain all three interpretations - and then conduct an investigation to decide which is closest to the truth.

 I find it a waste of time, then, simply to debate the reality of the UFO abduction phenomenon with anyone whose knowledge of the evidence is sketchy and whose beliefs are rigid. Too often that kind of experience has seemed more like arguing with a streetcorner evangelist than sharing the quest for truth with a genuinely open-minded colleague.

 However, I would like to propose a meeting with your group with a purpose other than a debate. I would like to set forth the protocols for the shared investigation of future cases as they come to my attention, to be carried out by any interested mental health professionals, especially those skilled in administering the standard battery of psychological tests and those with extensive clinical experience. Since we all agree on the prevalence of these very similar UFO abduction reports, I am sure that openminded mental health professionals in your organization would be quite interested in joining with me in the investigation of such cases, and may have procedural suggestions and particular protocols that they would like to amalgamate with my own.

 If you are interested in such a meeting - and it could be restricted to such openminded mental health professionals - please let me know. I can be reached by phone at [deleted]. In the interest of science, we should be working together, not in counter-productive ideological opposition. We should all be so skeptical that none of us can, at the outset, reject the possibility of anything - least of all something potentially so important to science.

 Sincerely,

 Budd Hopkins

 P.S.

I have no objection to your circulating this letter among your members.